Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

independent.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 141 posts

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#11

Post by NeutronBoy »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #9

I'm kind of split on our current gray area about free speech on the web. It seems like the only way to do good moderation is if it's powered by actual people sitting behind computers and following a well-written policy. But tech companies have proven themselves totally unwilling to pay for that. I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a co…

> I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a complete free speech zone."

They were literally doing this! Then they got slammed for 'censorship', so they got rid of the moderators. Now they're in the position they are now.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#12

Post by __jal »

Reason #37,758 that centralized communication services are, at the very least, suboptimal, and at worst, are a matter of life or death.

More generally, we need to stop supporting client-only systemts. Cell phones, for instance, could have a fallback peer-to-peer mode, if the carriers would allow it. Unfortunately, being a choke point tends to make more money than building resilient systems.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#13

Post by slamdance »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #9

I'm kind of split on our current gray area about free speech on the web. It seems like the only way to do good moderation is if it's powered by actual people sitting behind computers and following a well-written policy. But tech companies have proven themselves totally unwilling to pay for that. I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a co…

why are you "split" on having a "complete free speech zone"?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#14

Post by nkoren »

sergiotapia wrote: post #3

Interesting, here's a first-hand account of what's happening: https://streamable.com/zota1

Watched for a few minutes.

"Muslims are like African Carp. They breed rapidly [... yadda yadda yadda ...] Our entire race has been suffering under the burden of this minority..."

That's grade-A genocidal rhetoric he's deploying. Good for observing that evil can wear any kind of face. Not good for much else.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#15

Post by NTDF9 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #9

I'm kind of split on our current gray area about free speech on the web. It seems like the only way to do good moderation is if it's powered by actual people sitting behind computers and following a well-written policy. But tech companies have proven themselves totally unwilling to pay for that. I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a co…

Censorship is one of those really hard social problems. A completely open web will be inundated with spam, pornography and propaganda. A completely gated web will only serve the gatekeepers.

What really solves the problem is a 3rd party gatekeeper composed of "Council of Wise People".(henceforth referred to as gatekeepers). Movie rating board is an example.

This leads to the age old question, "Who will monitor the gatekeepers?"

This leads to democracy, where the gatekeepers only have a 4 year period and new gatekeepers are elected again.

The government should have been the gatekeepers. But turns out, these gatekeepers care more about their own pockets (filled by the same corps they are gatekeeping).

Humans suck :P

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#16

Post by jackmott »

slamdance wrote: post #13
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #9

I'm kind of split on our current gray area about free speech on the web. It seems like the only way to do good moderation is if it's powered by actual people sitting behind computers and following a well-written policy. But tech companies have proven themselves totally unwilling to pay for that. I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a co…

why are you "split" on having a "complete free speech zone"?

because so many people are horrible

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#17

Post by sp332 »

nkoren wrote: post #2

Please tell me it's just a coincidence that the independent.co.uk domain name is no longer resolving...

Yeah probably. When I checked just now it looked OK everywhere except Tesltra in Australia. https://www.whatsmydns.net/#A/www.independent.co.uk

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#18

Post by jonathankoren »

slamdance wrote: post #13
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #9

I'm kind of split on our current gray area about free speech on the web. It seems like the only way to do good moderation is if it's powered by actual people sitting behind computers and following a well-written policy. But tech companies have proven themselves totally unwilling to pay for that. I'd rather FB just said "we'll never pony up the wages necessary to moderate well so we're just going to make facebook a co…

why are you "split" on having a "complete free speech zone"?

Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory.[0]

This experiment has been repeatedly played out over decades. Without moderation, it always degenerates into shitposting trolls.

[0] https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#19

Post by otakucode »

jackmott wrote: post #16
slamdance wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why are you "split" on having a "complete free speech zone"?

because so many people are horrible

That would be a problem if it wasn't trivially easy to block them. Otherwise, people being horrible really isn't your problem unless you train yourself to be very conscious of their opinions and to care deeply about them. That's the only way their opinion can get to you. Of course, that training doesn't have to be conscious and a great many people have inadvertently trained themselves to be sensitive to the opinions of horrible people... but no one in the universe can do anything about that except the people themselves. (And no this doesn't remove blame from those hurling insults. I'm talking about how to deal with it yourself. If you're worried about how it reflects on them, and wanting to assign blame, you're still in the wrong mindset. You can control only yourself. Even if you were able to control others, it would make you a horrendously bad person to do so.)
Post reply on HN